First, too much is made of his parents, especially of Margaret Trudeau. Mrs Trudeau is a story, in her own right, but it’s a story better told on its own. I really don’t think that her sad story has much of any significant political impact on Justin Trudeau; nor do I think Pierre Trudeau is as major factor as some would like to believe.

While I agree that Prime Minister Trudeau is narrow, shallow and narcissistic, I think those might be the attributes of many young persons – of someone who was a child of the 1970s, a child of wealth and privilege, and who was not challenged with sufficient rigour or intensity.

I do not, not even for a μsecond, believe that Prime Minister Trudeau is either “soft on terror” or, somehow, supports radical Islam. I do believe that he has a fairly common bias against people and programmes that display either an abundance of caution about who should be allowed into Canada or that suggest that culture matters … in the way that Samuel Huntington suggested in a book by that name. Many people in the Laurentian Elites hew to a “line” that says that all cultures are equal. That is, I believe, demonstrably not true but it is an important token for many people, including, I suspect, Justin Trudeau.

I think that being narrow and shallow ~ lacking what the Brits call “bottom,” which is some undefined mix of strength, wisdom, experience, judgement and courage, Justin Trudeau is the prefect tool for cynical political operatives serving an old, decrepit, corrupt and failing clique of the rich and powerful Liberal insiders who wanted to use him (are using him, in my opinion) to regain their (largely invisible) access to the levers of power in Canada. One thing where I do agree with the Brazilian author is that “it all began” in early 2012 when Justin Trudeau pummelled bad-boy Senator Patrick Brazeau in a charity boxing match. Prior to that neither Michael Ignatieff nor Bob Rae had trusted M. Trudeau with a major critic post ~ he was, variously: critic for multiculturalism and youth; critic for youth, citizenship, and immigration; and critic for post secondary education, youth and amateur sport. But, despite that apparent lack of trust in his judgement and ability, by summer 2012 he was being, seriously, touted as the Liberal Party’s saviour leader. He still, in summer 2012, had no substance to show on any important policy issue but his charisma was undeniable. His rise to leadership was, largely, uncontested and he, and his campaign team, were given what amounted to being a “free ride” in the media until, essentially, the last few weeks of the campaign when it became evident that both Thomas Mulcair’s and Stephen Harper’s support had either collapsed or withered. By then many voters (40%) had decided that they were tired of Prime Minister Harper and that M. Mulcair did not offer the alternative they wanted and it was too late for the media to examine Justin Trudeau and inform Canadians about him.

So, we have what we have … but he is not anywhere near as bad as the Brazilian journalist makes out.

Let us, by all means, examine everything Prime Minister Trudeau does and says, but let us do so in light of the facts, not the myths, and let us do so honestly and openly and fairly. Let us examine and criticise him for what he says and does, not for his Mother and not for his good wife, either. Let us, Conservatives, not take cheap shots.